I
' ' . --.- :··· ,"") .. :,. ,,I
';:: ··:·::,?
..,.- --
FRA-OR&O 75-63
PS-26 1-a-·05 --THE--IMPACT OF THE U.S. ENERGY SITUATION
ON HIGH SPEED GROUND TRANSPORTATION
DECEMBER 1975
TECHNICAL REPORT
Document is available to the publ ic through the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151
Prepared for
S.C.R.T.O. LIBRARY.
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION Office of Research .an·d Development
Washington, D.C.
..
TECHNICAL REPORT ST AND ARD TITLE P M, F
1. Report No. 2. Government Accrssion No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. -----~-------.-----:---::---,-------·1 FRA-ORD & D 75-63
4. Title ond Subtitle
THE IMPACT OF THE U.S. ENERGY SITUATION ON HIGH SPEED GROUND TRANSPORTATION
7. Authorls)
5. Report Dote
December 1975 ---6. Performing Orgoni 1otion Code
8. · Performing Organization Report No.
Wi 11 <>.rd E. Fr.,,.a .... i.._z,.,_e _ _______ ___________ -+-...;:MTc:.=R:.:..-_;6::..:8:..:0:..:8::__ _________ ---l 9 . Perfo rming O rgoni2otio11 Nome ond Address 10. Work Unit No.
The MITRE Corporation, Westgate Park, McLean, VA 11. Contract or Grant No .
FR-30015 ---------------·-t--- --- ------- ---- - -------------------.1 13. Type of R.,port and Period Covered
12. Sponsoring Aguncy Nome and Address
Office of Research, Development and Demonstration Federal Railroad Administration
Technical Report
2100 2nd Street, S.W. 14 . Sponsor ing Agency Code
Washington, D.C. 20590 ~-----~~---------------- ----------'------------------15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract
U. S. energy supply issues for the next few decades are sunnnarized with a view toward their impact on high speed ground transportation (HSGT) modes. As background, the energy characteristics of intercity passenger modes, including 300 mph tracked levitated vehicle (TLV) systems, are presented and discussed. In the short and mid terms (through 1985 or 1990), energy shortages are seen to impact HSGT modes mainly through increased operating (fuel) costs; and the need for greater capacity flexibility. In the long term, HSGT modes may have to adapt to non-fossil fuels. Research topics for addressing energy impacts on HSGT are suggested.
17. Key Words
High Speed Ground Transportation, Tracked Levitated Vehicle, Energy
18, Distribution Statement
Document available to the public through National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22151
~------ --------- ·- - -·•-·- ----·---- --- -----------.----------; 19 . Se c urrty Clossif . (of this report ) 20. Security Clossif . (of this page) 21, No. of Pages 22. Price
Unclassified Unclassified 41 ~----·---- ··---- -··- -···~-------··- ·- --- ------_._------_._----·-----· Form DOT F 1700.7 10-691
01269
T . ...l . l. .:-: ·· . : ) -: ~_--_:_; ,. F -~-· ::?
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
INTRODUCTION
U.S. ENERGY SUPPLY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
U.S. TRANSPORTATION ENERGY CONSUMPTION
RAIL AND BUS SYSTEMS
TRACKED LEVITATED VEHICLE SYSTEMS
IMPACT OF ENERGY SHORTAGES ON HSGT
RESEARCH TOPICS
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A: CONVERSION FACTORS
i
Page
ii
1
3
13
21
25
33
37
39
41
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Energy Flow Patterns in the U.S.A.-1970
"Supply/Demand" (1960-1985) B/D Oil Equivalent
U.S. Energy Future Without Self-sufficiency
Self-s ufficiency by 1980 Through Conservation and Expanded Production
Approximate Supply/Price Scale for Petroleum and other Fos~il Fuels (Suggested by the Hudson Institute)
U.S. Transportation Energy Distribution by Mode (1970)
Distribution of Transportation Energy by Mode
Distribution of Transportation Energy by Purpose
Historical Variation in Energy Intensiveness for Passenger Modes .
Cruise Energy Intensiveness, Bus and New Rail
Motive Power Requirements for TLV Systems
Specific Energy Requirements for Various Transportation Modes
Distribution of U.S. Domestic Air Travel, 1968
Modal Comparison of Fuel Economy
ii
4
5
6
8
9
14
17
17
18
22
26
28
29
31
LIST OF l:LLUSTRATIONS ' (Continued)
Table Number
I
II
III
U.S. Transportation Energy-1970
Reported Modal Fuel Economy ,
Energy Crisis Cost Factor~
iii
Page
16
20
34
.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this paper is to sunnnarize the current U.S. energy
supply situation and recent government projections for the future, to
describe the energy characteristics of U.S. transportation modes,
to discuss the potential impact of energy supply changes on high speed
ground transportation (HSGT), and to delineate those R&D areas
essential to acconnnodating HSGT to future energy situations. The intent
is not to present a thorough analysis of U.S. transportation energy
issues, but rather to provide a working paper that can stimulate
discussion on the topic.
1
U.S. ENERGY SUPPLY
The overall energy flow pattern for the United States in 1970 is
comprehensively illustrated in Figure 1, which shows energy sources,
energy consuming sectors, and energy use efficiency (fraction of
consumed energy which performs the intended function - moving a
vehicle, heating a building, driving an electric generator, etc.).
Nearly 25% of all U.S. energy is consumed by the transportation sector,
more than 95% of it in the form of petroleum and natural gas liquids.
An insignificant portion of transportation energy is supplied as
electric power. Electric power is almost entirely dependent on fossil
fuels as the energy source; less than 2% of the electric power generated
in 1970.was dependent on nuclear energy, while 6% was hydropower.
Projections of energy supplies for the future involve many assump
tions which make all projections necessarily tentative. Nevertheless,
projections, such as that shown in Figure 2, are essential to the
planning process. Figure 2 shows projected supply, by domestic source,
and projected demand through the year 2000. The difference in the
demand/domestic supply projections represents imported energy require
ments and/or shortages. Shortages will be accommodated through con
servation and other demand-reducing measures.
If conservation were not employed and the energy demand curve of
Figure 2 continued to rise, the U.S. energy future might be as portrayed
in Figure 3. Such a projection, from a recent report of the U.S.
3
GEOTHERMAL 0.007
HYDROELECTRIC 0.85
NUCLEAR 0.24
NATURAL GAS
24.3
1.0
22.6
NATURAL GAS LIQUIDS
22.0- -
IMPORTS
ELECTRICAL CONVERSION ANO LINE LOSSES 9.8
ENO USES
RESIDENTIAL/
- ~ COMMERCIAL -<:.: 15.9
- - - - 15.6
INDUSTRIAL 21.0
NONE'N'::RGY
4.0
TRANS
PORTATION 16.3
FIGURE 1
REJECTED
31.2
All VALUES ARE
IN UNITS QF 1015
BTU. TOTAL PRO
DUCTION= 71.6 x l015 BTU
CONVERSION:*
I BTU= 1055 JOULE
1rA MORE COMPLETE TABLE A~EARSATTHEENDOF THIS PAPER.
SOURCE, AUSTIN ET AL. LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORIES, 1972
ENERGY FLOW PATTERNS IN THE U.S.A.-1970
-
"SUPPLY/DEMAND" 11960-19851
1/D Oil EflUfYAUNT n YEARS 80 .------,------r-----~----~-------,,-----~---~ 80
70
60
!,O
LU 0 0 (lJ
z 40 ~ ....I ....I
i
30
20
10
SOURCE:
CONVERSION:
B/DOE BARRELS PER DAY
OF OIL. EQUIVALENT
1 BARREL (42 GALS.)~ .159rn3
"SURPLUS OIL"
I ---,/
EARLY I - -EST. .-- .--
.--RECENT I
EST.
YEAR
"UNDERSTANDING THE NATIONAL ENERGY DILEMMA", A REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY,
--
15 AUGUST 1973. FIGURE 2 "SUPPLY/DEMAND"
(1960-1985)
•GEO.
NUCLEAR
DOM. GAS
~
COAL
SHL. OIL ALASKA -----lJOM . OIL
..... L '85
B/O OIL EQUIVALENT VS YEARS
5
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
(I
LU 0 e al z 0 ::; ....I
i
130
110
~ 90 µ:l
~ H :::> O' µ:l
ci 70 0
~ ~ -Cl)
,-l
; 50
z 0 H ,-l ,-l H 30 ~
10
1970 1980
SOURCE:
Conversion:
1 barrel (42 gal.)= 3 .159 m
DOMESTIC NONFOSSIL ENERGY
IMPORTED FOSSIL ENERGY
DOMESTIC FOSSIL ENERGY
1990 2000 2010 YEAR
2020 2030 2040 2050
AEC, THE NATION's ENERGY FUTURE, December 1973
FIGURE 3 U.S. ENERGY FUTURE WITHOUT SELF-SUFFICIENCY
6
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), acknowledges growing reliance on im
ported fossil energy and assumes a nearly steady supply of domestic
fossil energy (relying heavily on increased use of coal and, possibly,
oil shale) combined with rapid growth in domestic non-fossil energy.
If, however, the U.S. were to become self-sufficient from an energy
standpoint by 1980, the AEC report suggests, in Figure 4, how this
might be done through a combination of energy conservation and expanded
domestic fossil and non-fossil energy production. Conservation efforts
would have to reduce formerly projected imports by 1/3 by 1980, while
increased domestic energy production would account for the remaining
2/3. Since formerly projected energy imports for 1980 amounted to 25%
of projected energy demand, then conservation strategies, if self
sufficiency is to be realized by 1980, would entail an 8% (1/3 of 25%)
reduction in projected demand by that year. Because transportation
accounts for 25% of all U.S. energy consumption, conservation measures
of this magnitude will have a major impact on the evolution of trans
portation systems over the next decade or two.
The need to introduce non-petroleum fuels into our energy supply
to meet expected demand over the next few decades raises the prospect
of alternative fuels to which transportation systems must adapt. The
availability of new domestic fossil fuel sources, in the short and
mid terms (1974-1980 and 1980-1990, respectively) will be a function
of world oil prices. Figure 5, suggested by the Hudson Institute at
a recent symposium at the MITRE Corporation, indicates an approximate
7
12
9
6
3
0 .:;....___,;._.____......_ _ __.__..._ _ _,,_,.___~L--'--.....,__;L------'-'.___..__,..___......._.__
1973
Conversion:
1 barrel (42 gal.)
IMPORT REPLACEMENT
1975
3 = .159m
1977 YEAR
(Million Barrels/Day Oil Equivalent)
Formerly Projected Imports
Conservation Savings*
Expanded Domestic Nonfossil Production
Expanded Domestic Fossil Production
1979
1973
6.5
YEAR
1980
1980
12.0
4.7
1.5
5.8
*Includes both conservation techniques and energy real price increases.
SOURCE: AEC, THE NATION's ENERGY FUTURE, December 1973
FIGURE 4 SELF-SUFFICIENCY BY 1980 THROUGH CONSERVATION
AND EXPANDED PRODUCTION
8
9 I COAL LIQUIFICATION ,..:i
ij 8 OIL SHALE
OIL SANDS ,::Q
7 -<n-.. I ALASKAN FIELDS i::,:J 6 I TERTIARY RECOVERY OFFSHORE WELLS u H STRIPPER WELLS ~ p... 5 ,..:i H 0
4 I u .s. & REST OF WORLD PRESENT PRODUCTION
3
2 I MIDDLE EAST PRODUCTION
SHORT TERM MID TERM
FIGURE 5 APPROXIMATE SUPPLY/PRICE SCALE FOR PETROLEUM AND OTHER FOSSIL FUELS
(SUGGESTED BY THE HUDSON INSTITUTE)
9
supply/price scale for new petroleum and other fossil fuels. The
Middle East oil is a large supply and the cheapest to produce; it is
the only fossil fuel that can be produced at a profit for a price as
* low as $2 to $3 per barrel • Production from the U.S. and most of
the rest of the world is more expensive than Middle East oil. At
a price of $5 to $6 per barrel, it becomes profitable to work small
producer "stripper" wells and to stimulate existing wells to greater
production. In the same higher price range, new Alaskan and offshore
supplies could be brought in. Finally, at a price of $7 to $9 a
barrel, working of oil sands, oil shale and coal-based liquid fuels
begins to look profitable.
None of the alternative fossil fuels indicated in Figure 5 will
affect transportation systems except, of course, by way of increased
unit costs for fuel. The various required grades of fossil fuels now
in use (gasoline, kerosene, diesel fuel, etc.) can all be produced
from oil sands, oil shale, and coal. With the potential growing use
of non-fossil energy sources (nuclear, solar, geothermal, etc.) there
is the prospect that non-fossil energy may have to be used by the trans
portation sector, particularly if unforeseen extraction or environ
mental problems make the use of coal and oil shale impractical. With
abundant electric and/or solar power available, the possibility of
using alcohol (methanol) and hydrogen as alternative transportation
fuels needs to be considered. The potential for using stored electric,
* The current price of $11 to $12 per barrel for Middle East oil is artificially high, and does not reflect production cost.
10
* mechanical, and high temperature thermal energy in transportation
systems also needs study. Alcohol, while more expensive and lower in
specific energy content than hydrogen, offers the advantage of con
venient storage and transport as a liquid. Hydrogen suffers from
inconvenient and costly storage and handling problems, but is otherwise
a potentially viable alternate to fossil fuels. The unique safety
aspects of hydrogen as a fuel must be addressed. Hydrogen, the cleanest
burning of all chemical fuels, could well permit the use of on-board
power generation for intercity ground transportation systems in dense
urban corridors where air quality standards would otherwise force the
use of wayside electric power. Of all transportation modes, large
aircraft appear to be the best suited for use of hydrogen as a fuel.
Electric, mechanical, and thermal stored energy systems are clean
and compatible with total energy systems, but require major improvements
in energy density before application to intercity systems can be
considered.
* N.V. Philips Aachen Laboratory, Federal Republic of Germany, has pioneered recent advances in storage of thermal energy as the heat of fusion in fluoride eutectic salts. Hp to 10 times the energy density of the lead-acid battery have been achieved.
11
U.S. TRANSPORTATION ENERGY CONSUMPTION
The 1970 distribution of energy among the various transportation
modes for freight and passenger servic'!e is displayed in Figure 6.
The energy considered here is only the operating fuel energy. As
Dr. Hirst has demonstrated (Ref. 7) the total energy associated with
a mode should account for its manufacturing energy input, the energy
associated with distributing, maintaining, licensing, housing, and
insuring the vehicles, as well as the fuel energy required to operate
the system. For the automobile, Dr. Hirst calculated that the total
energy consumed by the automobile on the above basis is nearly twice
the operating fuel energy requirement.
Looking only at fuel energy, Figure 6 shows that better than half
(56%) of transportation fuel energy is consumed by the automobile,
with urban auto usage consuming the larger share. Note that light
trucks when used for personal transportation are included in the
statistics for the automobile. Freight consumes nearly 25% of all
transportation fuel, with two-thirds of this amount going to trucking.
Thus, the fuel consumed by all highway vehicles is three-quarters of
the total for transportation. Eleven percent of the total goes
to recreational vehicles, general aviation, and the military, with the
military consuming by far the largest share. The air passenger mode
consumes about 7%, several times what bus and passenger rail together
consumed. Auto and air are the dominating energy consumers, in the
aggregate, for intercity travel.
13
*INCLUDES p OF LIGHT TRERSONAL USE UCKS
DATA SOURCES· • MOTOR VE. • HIRST HICLE MANUFA • srnoM:t:Jt ]!12 124) crnnrns Assoc.,
1972
• AMERICAN TRANSNUARY 1973 (25) • CIVIL A IT ASSOC • CAMPB/L~ONAUTICS BOAR ii 11971-1972 (26) • MALLIAR , APRIL 1973 (28) , 971 (27)
IS & STROMBOTN . E,JEBRUARY 1973 (29)
SOURCE: FRAIZE ET THE MIT AL, FEB .•
74 RE CORP.,
U.S. TRANSPORTATION FIGURE 6 ENERG y DISTRIBUTION B . 14 y MOOE (1970)
..
A more detailed analysis of transportation energy consumption,
again for 1970, is given by Table 1 which presents not only the energy
consumption for each mode, but the useful transport work (passenger
miles or ton-miles), the load factor, and the energy intensiveness
(Btu/pass. mi., or Btu/ton mi.). Energy intensiveness is the energy
consumed per unit of useful transport work (passenger-miles or ton-miles),
and is,therefore, inversely related to a transport mode's efficiency.
The historical trends in U.S. transportation energy consumption
are displayed in Figures 7 and 8. Figure 7,showing the energy dis
tribution according to mode, displays the growth in highway and air
modes at the expense of a declining rail mode. A portion of the
decline in railroad energy consumption is due to the improved efficiency
of the diesel engine locomotives which were replacing the relatively
inefficient steam locomotives in the early part of the period. Figure 8
displays the growing fraction of transportation energy consumed in
passenger service (60% in 1970).
The efficiency of energy use is expressed either in terms of energy
intensiveness (energy consumption per unit of useful transport work,
such as passenger miles, seat miles, ton miles, etc.) or in terms of
fuel economy (e.g., seat miles/gal., pass. miles/Ral., ton milP.s/
gal., etc.); one is the inverse of the other. The historical trends
in energy intensiveness (Btu/pass. mile) for U.S. passenger modes
between 1950 and 1970 is presented in Figure 9. In this period, the
only significant changes in energy intensiveness occurred for the
15
TABLE I U.S. TRANSPORTATION ENERGY-1970
MOnf TRANSPORT WORK l OAll FACTOR
(Pass.Mi. or Ton mt I
PASSENCER SFRVln
Auto Urh,Ul G9x 10 17 1 4 pas5/vP-h.
tnt1•1cI1v Alf(ANATf
I 04 20
( Srn;tlt ,·dr-, )URf-/\KDOWN (J;i 19
Simi & 1:omp,1cl c;ns ID AlJlO MOD[ 1 73 19
I 1qh1 Tnu.:k 08 1.4
A" Short haul f • !JOO rm ) 018 Long haul I bOO nu I ..!Ql i\lfl MODf 119 119'½,
Hu, \J1b,ln 017 1 Q prl~'i/vPh
ln1eri:11y .028 22
School .062 25 BUS MOOE 097 19.2
H,i1I Urban 007 2s·v., Intercity 011 37% RAIL MODE .018
ALL PASSENGER SERVICE 20Mx 10 12p,t<.\ nu
f REIGHl SERVICE Truck S1nqle Umts 15 1.09 ton mi.I
vch m1.
Comh1nat•ons ALTERNATE
.35 9 21
( ~~::llfl!~r~::p: ) BREAKDOWN ( .39 ) 11
TRUCK MOnE 50 HJ H,ul 17
Au 004 P1pt!lllll! 43
I ~•1,,te1way 60
2~:.: 10 1210n mt 1\L L FREIGHT SERVICE
OTHFA
Gener di Av•dllOll
Rt'P1!<Hlonal Vehicles M1l1ldl',,'
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION
O<1ta Sou,ces • Motor Vehicle Manuf1teturers A!!,SOC., '72 ! 14)
• Hirs1, Man:h '72 !24) • Stromhomo, Jan. '73 (261 • MHlham & Strombntne, Feh ·7:4 (29) • Ame11r.an Trnn,11 Assoc., 'JI ·n (261
• Camphell, April '73 128) • Civil Aeronau11cs Boartt, 1971 (27)
CONVERSION:
1 BTU = 1055 JOULE
1 TON= 907.2 KG
1 MILE= 1.609 KM
1 TON MILE~ 1460 KG KM
1 BTU/PASS Ml = 656 JOULE/PASS-KM
1 BTU/TON Ml= .723 JOULl;/KG-KM
16
ENERGY INTENSlVENf.SS fBtu/paH.nH or Btu/Ion ni1 )
(Al current load lac101)
7550 ( 12 1 mpg)
3250 I 16 0 mpql 3220 i212mool 5300 t12.9m119)
4980 113.6 mpyl 9000 I 10 1 mpgl
1noo 8120 9300 2940 I 4 4 rnpq)
10/0 I S.f> mpg)
770 I 6 75 mpgl t240 I 5 5 mnql 4300 2730 3330 --5250 Btu/pas'i rTu
10650 Btu/Ion m,
3440
5600 676
37500 420 750 --
1780 Btu/ton m1.
ENERGY CONSUMPl lON
11015 Btul
Ad1ht1ve
Suhrotals Totals
5 2 3.4
( 7 ~~ )
~ 8 fi
n 72 BB
110 1 10 .06 03 04
""i2 12
.03 03
06 06 -10 6
1 6
1 2
Ia ?H 52 15 1H 45 -
4 1
10 ,o
1 5 -16 5
SOUl~Cl FRAl/'f, W. !_, r T AL. THE MITIH COHP., FF.8. 1914
•
"
--r '
/ /
,_ w mu "
/ /
u --, ([J
>-.., a: w z w 2 Q ,_ ;' a: 0 a. 50 V, z <t "-,_ _J
<t :, z z <t .. n . . , w ,, er w
" 1960
I I
I I
I /-
,/
I
I I
I 15
1-w .., 0 -::>
"' >-10 ~
w z w
~ ~ a: 0 a. V, z <I a: t--
5 ;j ::, z z <I _J
<I
o t--
t--~ ,oo a ::, (Il .,,, >-.., a: w z w z Q t--;:! a: 0 CL 50 V, z <I a: t--__J
<I ::, z z <t ... 0 t--z w u a: w a.
ORNL-DWG 72-15~9~ r ------------
I I
I I
I
,✓/-,I
/ /
/ -~---~,, --.,..,,, OTHER
INTER-CITY FREIGHT
1960
I I
I 15
,n
g t--w .., 0 :,
<D
>.., 10 er
w z w z 0 .= ;:! a: 0 a. V, z <t a: t--
5 ;j ::, z z <I _J <[ to t--
FIGURE 7 DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORTATION
ENERGY BY MODE
FIGURE 8 DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORTATION
ENERGY-BY PURPOSE
CONVERSION:
l BTU= 1055 JOULE
SOURCE: HIRST, E., ENERGY INTENSIVENESS OF PASSENGER AND FREIGHT TRANSPORT MODES, 1950-1970, OAK RIDGE NATIONAi,... LABORATORY, REPORT ORNL·NSF-EP-44, APRIL 1973.
17
~ .E I
---Q)
O' C Q) 1/1 1/1 0 a.
' ::, (I)
(/) (/) w z w > (/)
z w I-z >-(.'.)
a:: w z w
8000 -
6000
4000 --
2000
0 1950
ORNL-DWG 72-11918
URBAN AUTO
URBAN MASS TRANSIT
INTER-CITY AUTO
RAILROAD
1 1960 1970
FIGURE 9
CONVF HSION,
I A TU/PASS Ml ~ 656 JOULE/PASS KM
SOUllCf, HI RS I, E., OP. Cl r ., APRIL 1913
HISTORICAL VARIATION IN ENERGY INTENSIVENESS FOR PASSENGER MODES
18
intercity mass modes:
• energy intensiveness for air increased rapidly (by a factor
of 2) with the advent of higher speeds made possible by the
commercial jet engine around 1960;
• energy intensiveness for rail declined rapidly in the first
half of the period (1950-1960) as steam locomotives were phased
out;
• intercity bus became less efficient as highway speeds
increased.
The energy intensiveness (or fuel economy) on a passenger mile
basis incorporates the effect of load factor; energy usage on a seat
mile basis allows comparison of system potential performance without
regard to load factor and is, therefore, a more objective measure
for comparing transportation vehicle systems on an energy basis.
The fuel economy for a number of passenger modes, as reported by several
investigators, is sunnnarized in Table II. Both seat-mile/gallon and
passenger-mile/gallon bases are used. Table II illustrates the
difficulty in obtaining consistent values of fuel economy for a given
mode. Not only is there the obvious difference between passenger
miles, seat miles, and vehicle miles (the effects of load factor and
vehicle seating configuration, both of which affect the quality of
service in a direction opposite to fuel economy), but also the differences
in vehicle speed, cruise performance versus overall duty-cycle perform
ance, measured versus calculated performance, and reliability of data
sources that must be taken into account.
19
'l'AHLE I l
REPORTED MODAL FUEL ECONOMY
'
INVESTIGATOR DOT/TSC DOT/OTEP RICE (Reference) (1) (2) (3)
UNITS PSGR PSGR SEAT mpg mpg mpg
AUTOMOBILE SUBCOMPACT
AVERAGE )0 30 61,
INTERCITY BUS 110 104 215
TRAIN
CROSS COUNTRY 50 150• 144
METROLINER 75
COMMUTER 200
SUBURBAN 400
Al Rl'LANE
WIDE l\ODll-:ll .IE'I' 40
AVERAt:E 16 JI, '14
SOURCE: For Tabll' LI - Nutll'r, k. D., "A Perspectivt.• on Transportat lon Fuel Economy," The Ml TRE Corporation, March 1974.
REFERENCES FOR TABLE II
' HIRST HIRST
' NCHP
(4) (5) i, (6)
PSf,R PSGR PSGR mpg mpg I mpg
i I
12 ]8 i )2
]25 82 ! 125
I
80 1+6 80
100
200
l2
14 I h 71
I
DOT /OST FRAIZE (7) (8)
SEAT SEAT mpg mpg
JOO LOO
'JOO 250
210 210
'
(i'j
'>2
i 'lb
LIEB AUSTEN (9) (10)
SEAT SEAT mpg mpg
85 91
78
270
22
seot mile/gal E
42', seat km/m3
MOOZ (11)
PSGR mpg
25
78
50
18
1. Transportation Systems Center, "Transportation F.nc._•rgy Conserv,Hlon Options," (DRAFT) DiscuRsion PaperR, Report No. DP-SP-11, October 1973.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation Energy Policy, U.S. DOT (Lnfurmal pl..rnning papers), November 1973.
J. Rice, R. A., "System Energy as a Factor 1n Considering Future Transporlatlon," /\SHE pap,•r 70-WA/Ener 8, December 1970.
4. Hirst, Eric, "Energy Consumption for Transportation lu the U.S.," 0;1k Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL-NSF-EP-15, March 1973.
5. Hirst, Eric, 11 Energy l ntens 1 vencss of PARHP.ngl" r and Freight Transportat 1 on Modet. 1 ORNL-NSF-EP-44, April 1973.
6. National Commission on Materials Policy, Final Report, June 1973.
7. J.S. DOT, Office of tht.• Sl•cret.,ry, "High Speed Ground Transportation /\ltl"rnatlves Study,"· January 197'1.
8. Fraize, W. E., P. Dyson, S. W. Gouse, Jr., "Energy nnd EnvlronmC'nlal AspeclH of U.S. TrnnHportntion, MITRE pnper MTP-191, February 1974.
9. l.leh, J., MITRF. lnt,•nrnl memorandum D2J-M2'18A, .July 197'\.
10. Austen nntl Hel lnum, 11P11HH1•11gt•r C:;1r VtlPI l~cnnomy--'l'ri•1u1~; and lnf)uc>nclny, Fat'lllrH," SAE paper 1)0790,
Sl•ptl•mht•r 197].
11. MllOZ, W. 1-:., "Em•rgy Trend:--i and Tlwlr Futurf' i-:fre(·ls llpnn Tr,rnHporrat llin," HAND Corporntion Pllpf'r l'-5046, ,luly '1073_
12. FLIGHT Internn~ional, "Wht•re llil!'-1 all rhe Fuel Cone," N11vl·mbt.>r 1973- Ntl'J'I•:: v:!111l'S f<1r Ettru~w:rn Vl'hkl1'S.
20
FLIGHT (12)
SEAT mpg
120
450 .. 393
57-68
4 l
' .
RAIL AND BUS SYSTEMS
The impact of speed for intercity bus and new rail systems is
demonstrated in Figure 10, which shows cruise energy intensiveness
(But/seat mile) as a function of cruise speed. Figure 10 illustrates
several factors that bear on the energy consumption of bus and rail
systems:
• At high speeds (above 50 mph) aerodynamic drag predominates
for rail systems (the same is true for bus, but is not
illustrated by calculation in Figure 10).
• On the basis of cruise performance, a rail system can, for the
same energy expended per seat mile, operate at twtce the
cruise speed of highway vehicles (i.e., bus). The major rea
sons for the cruise energy advantage of rail over bus are:
•• Reduced rolling friction (steel wheels on rail yield 1/10
the rolling resistance of rubber tires on concrete).
•• Better fineness ratio (volume to frontal area) and, hence,
lower aerodynamic drag for rail compared to bus.
• Because of the relatively small effect of vehicle weight on
cruise performance of rail systems, rail vehicles can be con
siderably heavier in terms of weight/seat than bus, thereby
providing greater flexibility in vehicle design, including
the option for more spacious seating and other on-board
passenger services. However, vehicle weight exacts an energy
cost in actual duty cycles which include acceleration and
21
•
"' "'
.. • .. C
! .. • ! ~ >
! .. ! ►
" 0:
!
1aa,
-
NOTE
• GREV>-tOUND MC-7 ANO IPT CURVES ARE CALCULATED. • TURBOTAAIN & METROLINEA PERFORMANCE IS
CALCULATED USING SOME EMPI AICAL OAT A TO JUSTIFY DRAG COEFFICIENTS.
• TGV PERFORMANCE 15 A PROJECTION OF THE FRENCH NATIONAL RAILWAY iSNCF) BASED ON TEST DATA FOR THE TGVOOl EXPERIMENTAL TURBOTAAIN (RAILWAY GAZETTE INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 1973).
• HST PERFORMANCE IS BASED ON INSTALLED POWER ANO ATTAINED TEST SPEED (RAILWAY GAZETTE tNTERfl,jATIONAL. SEPTEMBER 1973)
• ROHR TURBOT RAIN DATA 15 FROM AVIATION WEEK, 2c JUNE 1974.
GREYHOUND BUS 1«:-7 47SEATS 711 LB/SEAT
,.P.o' .-.1~f."'
,..,:,:z.'\) ,,t-,.1.Co
~ff\'-
50
CONVERSION CRUISE SPEED. IIPH
1 LB '536KG
I MPH 1 609 KM HR
l MPG 425 KM.'",t3 FIGURE 10
100
1 BTu,sEAT MILE= 656 JOULE/SEAT MILE CRUISE ENERGY INTENSIVENESS, BUS AND NEW RAIL
IIETROLINER 312SEA1S Z75G LB/SEAT.
TURBOTRAIN -SEATS 118& LWSEA T
150
0 ..... RllJRaJTRAIN J1•SEATS 1910 LB/SEAT
-SEATS -UIISEAT
IWtlO'ft.O PASSBmE.R TRAIN (IPTI :m&EAT 1415 LIi/SEAT
grade requirements. Therefore, weight is not an insignificant
factor by any means, and attempts to reduce weight are a major
goal of all new high speed rail development efforts.
• The propulsion system efficiency has a direct effect on energy
consumption (not motive power); the IPT model assumes an efficient
regenerative gas turbine having an overall efficiency (engine
plus transmission) of 28%; for the Turbotrain, using an air-
craft gas turbine, the overall efficiency is approximately
16%; for the electrified Metroliner, the overall conversion
efficiency is approximately 25%.
In addition to rolling resistance and fineness ratio, which affect
cruise performance, rail systems have two other inherent energy-related
advantages over bus:
• Rail rights-of-way are generally more levtl than highway,
• Rail travel involves less stop and start in getting out of a
terminal and onto the main right-of-way than does bus.
As opposed to the inherent advantages of rail systems, as listed
above, there are several practical operating characteristics of rail
systems which tend to increase their energy intensiveness:
• Most passenger trains use electric drive, either diesel-elec
tric or wholly electrified. The efficiency of the mechanical
to-electrical-to-mechanical conversions is lower than direct
mechanical transmission used in the bus. On the other hand,
the larger train diesels work under more nearly constant load
23
and can therefore achieve a higher efficiency for the prime
mover. The effects will tend to compensate.
• Rail coach seating is far less dense than bus. In general,
rail seating approximates first class air while bus approxi
mates economy class air in seats per unit of floor space.
• Intercity trains frequently carry baggage cars, dining cars,
and lounge cars which are normally not included in seat-mile
estimation. Parlor cars and sleepers are very low density
seating vehicles.
• Rail costs have been dominated by fixed costs and labor costs
so that strong incentives for fuel economy have not existed
as has been the case for bus.
24
•
TRACKED LEVITATED VEHICLE SYSTEMS
In the High Speed Ground Alternatives Study (Ref. 15), prepared
by the MITRE Corporation for the U.S. DOT, the cruise performance and
energy cost of improved rail systems and tracked levitated vehicles
(TLVs) were estimated. Both magnetically levitated (MAGLEV) and air
cushion levitated vehicle concepts were considered. For all TLV sys
tems, the motive power requirements, based on the state-of-knowledge
as of late 1972, were calculated. The results are shown, as a function
of cruise speed, in Figure 11 for three hypothetical 300 pass~nger,
300,000 lb. (136,000 kg) gross weight vehicles:
• Tracked air cushion cehicle (TACV) using static air cushions.
• Tracked repulsion MAGLEV vehicle using on-board superconducting
magnet coils.
• Tracked attraction MAGLEV vehicle.
On the basis of power alone, this comparison shows a decided ad
vantage for the attraction MAGLEV system, because the magnetic drag is
estimated to be considerably less than the comparable suspension-related
drag for either of the other two systems. For all systems, aerodynamic
drag is the same. For TLV systems, support and guidance power is rela
tively large, compared to _the rolling resistance of rail systems (see
Figure 10). At 300 mph cruise, aerodynamic drag accounts for only 54%
of the motive power requirements for the TACV. The corresponding per
centages for repulsion and attraction MAGLEV are 59% and 76% respect
ively.
25
20
15 ~ MOMENTUM DRAG .,
10 AIR SUPPLY COMPRESSOR
5 AERODYNAMl C DRAG
0
20
REPULSION 15,000 ,....
15 MAGLEV - } MAGN£TIC ~ DRAG & M CRYOGENIC 0 .... 10 POWER .....
I 5 AERODYNAMIC ~
\ DRAG '\ .... ~ 0 FOPI ALL SYSTEMS:
300 PASS,
20 300,000 LB. GROSS WT. 126 FT.2 FRONTAL AREA
ATTRACTION .40 DRAG COE FF. 15 MAGLEV
10
5 AERODYNAMIC DRAG
0 0 100 200 300
SPEED (mph)
CONVERSION: SOURCE: U.S. DOT; HIGH SPEED GROUND
ALTERNATIVES STUDY,
1 LB • .4536 K9 JANUARY 1973,
1 FT2 • .0929 M 1 HP - .7467 KW 1 MPH • 1 .609 I( M/H Pl
FIGURE 11 • MOTIVE POWER REQUIREMENTS FOR TLV SYSTEMS
.26
The 300 mph cruise performance for the TLV systems is shown in
comparison with other modes in Figure 12. Each system is shown at
its rated cruise speed, and for each,the energy intensiveness (Btu/
seat mile) has been estimated. The aircraft data include the estimat
ed energy for the landing/take-off (LTO) cycle, because the LTO
energy, at least for short-haul trips of 300 miles (483 km) or so is
not negligible. Figure 12 indicates that future TLV systems can
effectively compete, on an energy per seat-mile basis, with short
haul aircraft while offering a cruise speed of 300 mph (483 km/hr)
(as opposed to 565 mph (910 km/hr) for short-haul aircraft). In
intercity service, TLV sytems can provide city-center to city-center
service so that the door-to-door time for TLV and short-haul may be
comparable in spite of the significant difference in cruise speed,
The role for TLV systems as an alternate to short-haul air
service in congested corridors will not involve significant savings
in the total transportation energy budget for the United States.
Figure 13 shows the cumulative distribution of fuel consumed and
passenger miles for scheduled U.S. domestic air travel for 1968.
If, for example, all air traffic for trips below 500 miles (810 km)
in length were picked up by TLV systems, the maximum fuel savings
involved would be less than 20% of the air mode fuel budget, or less
than 1.5% of the nation's transportation energy budget.
Thus, while total energy savings will not likely, by itself, be
a strong justification for TLV systems, there will be many situations
27
N ::c
AUTO, 4 PASS., 60 MPH
i>>>>>>-.,, ,:::,y::,::,,::,,>,::,,,,, > >>I AMTRAK METROLINER, 382 PASS.
150 MPH I 170 MPH I TURBOTRAIN 144 PASS.
R&O UNCERTAINTY
ALL ENERGY ESTIMATES ARE FOR CRUISE ONLY, EXCEPT FOR AIR MODES FOR WHICH LANDING/ TAKE-OFF(LTO)ENERGYISINCLUDED
SOURCES: GROUND MODES-U.S. DOT (321 DC-9-30-MCDONNELL-DOUGLAS (33) 8747-WEISS (34) L TO DATA-EPA (35)
TRACKED LEVITATED VEHICLE (FUTURE): 300 MPH
I',,,, ,::,::,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,::,:,y,::,;,::,.;:,,::,::,::,,,,,,, ,::,::,,::,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,::,,::,::,,::,::,::,::,::,::,::,::,,1c < < 4 8747, 2760 MILE TRIP, INCLUDING L TO CYCLE, 315 PASS., 580 MPH
0 .5 1.0
CONVERSION:
1 BTU1SEAT MILE== 656 JOULE 1 SEAT KM
1 MPH== 1 609 KMtHA
1 FT"" .3048M
1.5 2.0 2.5
SPECIFIC ENERGY, 103 BTU FUEL/SEAT MILE
FIGURE 12
3.0 3.5
SOURCE: FRA1ZE, ""· E. ET AL, THE MITRE CORP., REPORT MTP-391 FEBRUARv 1974
SPECIFIC ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION MODES
•
4.0
•
100
90
80
70
CUMULATIVE 60
DISTRIBUTION OF Al R PASSENGER- 50 MILES AND FUEL CONSUMPTION (¾) 40
i...J ,0
30
20
10
0 0 500
CO>.,\, E RSIO._,
1 Ml LE a 1 609 '( M
1 LB SEAT M'LE • .2819 KG SEAT KM
FUEL
PASSENGER MILES
1000 1500 2000
TRIP LENGTH (MILES)
FIGURE 13
PASS. Ml. DATA SOURCE: CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, 1969 (40)
ASSUMED FUEL CONSUMPTION:
0-200 Ml 200-400 400-600 600-1000 1000-2000 > 2000
2500
.2 LB/SEAT MILE
.13
.11
.10
.09
.085
3000 3500
SOURCE, FRAIZE, W. E., ET AL,
4000
THE M,TRE CORP., REPORT MTP 391, FE6. 1974
DISTRIBUTION OF U.S. DOMESTIC AIR TRAVEL, 1968
in congested intercity corridors where TLV's will be an attractive
alternate, offering:
• City-center to city-center service.
• Reduced energy consumption compared to the short-haul air
alternative.
• Flexibility, through wayside electric power, to utilize a
wide range of basic energy sources,
• Reduced air corridor and highway congestion,
In summary, the potential fuel economy (seat miles/gallon) is
displayed, for the most important passenger transportation systems,
as a function of cruise speed in Figure 14. TLV systems are seen
again to fill in the speed regime gap between 150 and 300 mph (483
km/hr), All ground systems are seen to fall below an envelope of shape
2 given by 1/(speed) ; this defines the aerodynamic drag of vehicles
at sea level. Aircraft performance rises above this envelope because
of operation in reduced air density.
None of the above discussion of energy should be construed to
imply that energy is or will be the major determining force in HSGT
system development. Othe.r important travel-related factors not dis
cussed here are: convenience, speed, safety, and comfort.
30
•
JOO
200
z 0 -' -' < t3 a: w 0.. ., w -'
~ ... < w .,
100
0
0
..
BICYCLE (PETROLEUM TO PRODUCE FOOD ENERGY)
SUBURBAN TRAINS
INTERCITY BUS
INTERCITY TRAINS
MOTORBIKE 11 PSGRI
Ml NICAR OR MOTORCYCLE 12 PSGRI
' ' ' COMPACT CAR
FUTURE HIGH SPEED GROUND
1/ U.S. SEDAN (6 PSGRI
-' ~' -'~ JET AIRCRAFT -
~ ' -~ ' ~ ~ ~ PROP. AIRCRAFT ~ ~
100 200 JOO 400 500
MILES PER HOUR
CONVERSION
1 MILE/HA 1.609 KM/HA 3
1 Sf AT MILE/GAL 425 SEA.I KM/M
SOURCL: NUTTER, 11.0., THE MITRE CORP, MAR. 1974
FIGURE 14 MODAL COMPARISON OF FUEL ECONOMY
31
•
...
IMPACT OF ENERGY SHORTAGES ON HSGT
Short term energy shortages of the sort experienced during the
winter of '74, will likely be addressed through higher fuel costs, con
servation measures wherever possible, and, for the private automobile
driver, rationing either by regulation or through inconvenience in the
purchase of fuel. Intercity service would not likely be severly cur
tailed because the bulk of any energy "short-fall" will be taken-up
by the automobile user. On the other hand intercity mass transportation
modes are apt to be strained to over-capacity as fuel supplies for
automobile travel become less dependable.
In the mid-term, a steady state supply-demand equilibrium at the
higher price established by new domestic energy sources would likely be
realized. Prices might continue to rise slowly as domestic fuel sources
begin to run short and become more expensive to extract.
In both the short and mid-terms (through 1985 or 1990), the major
energy impact on HSGT will be through increased cost. Table Ill
illustrates the effect of energy cost increases of 50% and 200% on
the total cost of travel for several major modes. The automobile
mode will suffer by far the biggest impact of rising fuel costs,
because virtually the only cost perceived by the privare automobile
operator is fuel cost. This suggests that fuel cost increases will
produce strong pressure to shift traffic from auto to the mass modes;
but, since the mass modes are relatively insensitive to fuel costs
(a three-fold increases in fuel cost yields less than a 20% increase in
travel cost), there will be little economic pressure to shift among the
33
;_; .;:-
TABLE III
ENERGY CRISES COST FACTORS
Cost of Travel ~on-Energy Energy
:t-1ode Related Portion Related Portion (C ) n (C) e
Auto 0% 100%
Air 90 10
Bus 95 5
IPT 97.5 2.5
TLV 95 5
* C = C t n + Fe (Ce)
**Fe= 1.5: 50% fuel cost increase
= 3.0: 200% fuel cost increase
•
Total Cost Factor {Ct)* Energy Crisis Equals: (F )**
1.5 3.0 e
1.5 3.0
1.05 1.20
1.025 1.10
1.0125 1.05
1.025 1.10
SOURCE: U.S. DOT, High Speed Ground Transportation Alternatives Study, Jan. 1973
•
I.,
mass modes. The mass modes can best accomodate future fuel cost in-
creases by building in the ability to rapidly increase system capacity.
Finally, in the long term (2000 and beyond), transportation will
adapt to long term stable energy sources with a range of fuels:
POTENTIAL LONG-TERM ENERGY SOURCES
Solar/Geothermal/Wind
Nuclear
Coal
Oil Shale
COMPATIBLE FUELS
Hydrogen Methanol Electricity Stored Thermal Energy
Electricity Hydrogen
Electricity Distillates Methane Hydrogen
Distillates Electricity
HSGT systems developed over the next 10 to 20 years should be
designed for compatibility with the most likely long-term fuels to be
available during the systems's lifetime.
35
-
RESEARCH TOPICS
Among the topics for research effort that will address the energy
aspects of future HSGT are the following:
Systems Studies and Analysis
• Motivation for use of mass transportation systems.
• The impact of regulation and operating procedures on modal
fuel efficiency.
• Measures to improve load factor.
• Land use/transportation relationships.
• Revised transportation demand projections, accounting for fuel
supply shortages and changes.
• Passenger/freight service compatibility.
Technology R&D
• Rail electrification costs, benefits, and environmental impact.
• Hydrogen and methanol utilization as transportation fuels.
• Use of stored e1ectric, mechanical, and high temperature thermal
energy.
• Environmental impact of fossil fuel usage.
• Efficient engines (internal and external combustion prime movers)
having a wide range of fuel flexibility.
• Improved power transmissions for ground vehicles.
• Means for reduced rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag for
groW1d vehicles.
• Rail/right-of-way/suspension design to acconnnodate optimally
both passenger and freight service.
37
,
REFERENCES
1. Austin, A.L., et al., Energy: Uses, Sources, Issues, Report UCRL-51221, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, May 1972.
2. Understanding the National Energy Dilemna, a Report of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, 15 August 1973.
3. The Nation's Energy Future, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, December 1973.
4. Fraize, W.E., et al., The MITRE Corportation, Report MTP-391, Energy and Environmental Aspects of U.S. Transportation, February 1974.
5. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the U.S., Inc., 1972 Automobile Facts and Figures.
6. Hirst, Eric, Energy Consumption for Transportation in the U.S., Report ORNL-NSF-EP-15, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, March 1972.
7. Strombotne, Richard L., Energy Usage Related Activities of the U.S. Department of Transportation, International Automobile Engineering Congress and Exposition, 8-12 January 1973.
8. American Transit Association, '71 - '72 Transit Fact Book.
9. Civil Aeronautics Board, Handbook of Airline Statistics, 1971 Edition.
10. Campbell, M. Earl, "The Energy Outlook for Transportation in the United States," Traffic Quarterly, April 1973.
11. Malliaris, A.C., and Strombotne, R.L., Demand for Energy by the Transportation Sector and Opportunities of Energy Conservation, presented to the Conference on "Energy: Demand, Conservation, and Institutional Problems," Massachusetts Institute of Technology, February 1973.
12. Hirst, Eric, Energy Intensiveness of Passenger and Freight Transport Modes, 1950-1970, Report Mo. ORNL-NSF-EP-44, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, April 1973.
13. R. D. Nutter, A Perspective of Transportation Fuel Economy, The MITRE Corportation, MTP-396, April 1974.
14. U. S. Department of Transportation, High Speed Ground Transportation Alternatives Study, PB-220 079, January 1973.
39
REFERENCES Cont'd
15. DC-9 Series 30 General Performance, Report No. MDC-J0594, Revised 7 June 1971, McDonnell Douglas Corp.
16. Weiss, G.L., Letter-to-the-Editor, The Washington Post, 22 January 1974.
17. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Air Programs Office, February 1972.
40
APPENDIX A
CONVERSION FACTORS
(English to SI Units)
• 1 ft .2048 (m) = metre
1 mile = 1.609 km
1 lbm = .4536 kilogram (kg)
1 ton ::::! 907.2 kg
1 gallon .003785 m 3 =
1 barrel (petroleum) = .159m3
1 BTU = 1055 joule (J)
1 horsepower (HP) = .7457 kilowatt
1 mile/ gallon = 425 km/m3
1 ton-mile = 1460 kg km
1 BTU/pass mile = 656 J/pass-km
1 BTU/ton mile = .723 J/kg-km
:-
,.
41
+